The problem is you are equating "hallucinate" and "exaggerate" with "lie"

I think the better question is, "If someone lies to themselves, then tells that lie to others as if it is true, because they have convinced themselves that their lie is true, are they liars?"

Not relevant. That would be a kind of hallucination. Yes kind of a stretch of definition, but since 'delusion' seems to be such a politically charged word in atheist circles.

But yes, if you lie to yourself...it is still a lie.

Logged

An Omnipowerful God needed to sacrifice himself to himself (but only for a long weekend) in order to avert his own wrath against his own creations who he made in a manner knowing that they weren't going to live up to his standards.

I don't have any specific thing in mind I'd like to hear. Really, I'd just like to see an attempt at a respectful and more neutral tone; I don't know the exact steps necessary to achieve this. Perhaps you can help steer us both towards a happy medium.

Do you feel that the tone I have adopted in this thread is appropriate, for instance?

It's interesting that you say no theists have even answered the question. Surely some slobbering fool has hashed out a fragmented sentence in the time you claim you have been using this argument? Perhaps you aren't asking it in the right places.If you're asking this of any theist anywhere - I'm sure you could find a Muslim, Deist (which should technically be valid), Hindu, Buddhist, etc who will be glad to declare "Well sir, I don't believe the bible!"But, I imagine you're probably looking for a Christian to give you an answer you deem acceptable? Hm. I may have your answer for you then, of sorts. The problem is, you're asking the wrong question. I am a Christian, and yet I treat the bible in the sort of manner Reagan treated the Soviets - Trust but verify. When I hear a claim that something is untrue about the bible, I tend to take the time to research what the problem is and decide if the claims are valid. So far, at worst, the bible appears unverifiable in parts or ambiguous in others, but nothing absolutely wrong or contradictory which would probably show exaggerations or lies etc (In fact, your argument proves true quite often with people who make false claims about the bible). However, most any other ancient text you can name is indeed full of problems like those, making this an excellent argument in favor of the accuracy of the bible. So really, the problem is the apparent assumption you have, that Christians apparently assume the bible should not be treated with skepticism. I hope that is sufficient.By the way, don't ask me about specifics, the bible is a big book and there are plenty of other forums and people to ask about such things.

When I hear a claim that something is untrue about the bible, I tend to take the time to research what the problem is and decide if the claims are valid. So far, at worst, the bible appears unverifiable in parts or ambiguous in others, but nothing absolutely wrong or contradictory which would probably show exaggerations or lies etc.... {snip}By the way, don't ask me about specifics, the bible is a big book and there are plenty of other forums and people to ask about such things.

I'm afraid it doesn't work that way -- if you say you haven't found anything wrong or contradictory in the bible on this site, you'd better be ready for the atheists here to give you some examples and ask you to explain why you don't view them as wrong or contradictory (e.g., talking snakes, talking donkeys, one million people living in a desert for forty years and leaving no archeological evidence, etc etc)

Logged

[On how kangaroos could have gotten back to Australia after the flood]: Don't kangaroos skip along the surface of the water? --Kenn

It's interesting that you say no theists have even answered the question. Surely some slobbering fool has hashed out a fragmented sentence in the time you claim you have been using this argument? Perhaps you aren't asking it in the right places.If you're asking this of any theist anywhere - I'm sure you could find a Muslim, Deist (which should technically be valid), Hindu, Buddhist, etc who will be glad to declare "Well sir, I don't believe the bible!"But, I imagine you're probably looking for a Christian to give you an answer you deem acceptable? Hm. I may have your answer for you then, of sorts. The problem is, you're asking the wrong question. I am a Christian, and yet I treat the bible in the sort of manner Reagan treated the Soviets - Trust but verify. When I hear a claim that something is untrue about the bible, I tend to take the time to research what the problem is and decide if the claims are valid. So far, at worst, the bible appears unverifiable in parts or ambiguous in others, but nothing absolutely wrong or contradictory which would probably show exaggerations or lies etc (In fact, your argument proves true quite often with people who make false claims about the bible). However, most any other ancient text you can name is indeed full of problems like those, making this an excellent argument in favor of the accuracy of the bible. So really, the problem is the apparent assumption you have, that Christians apparently assume the bible should not be treated with skepticism. I hope that is sufficient.By the way, don't ask me about specifics, the bible is a big book and there are plenty of other forums and people to ask about such things.

One: Non answers like "You lie;" or "I will need to get back to you;" or "You don't deserve an answer;" or "You aren't asking the right questions;" are not answers...they are evasions.

Two: I never said Bible. This is a jumping off point for any Ancient text gnostic theism. It doesn't work for Deists. I like Deists.

Three: All of Genesis contradicts many many many verifiable scientific facts. Your argument is a non starter right at the start.

As to Contradictions?My particular favorites are Judas dying two different ways, The order of Creation varing, and is it 2 animals or 7 animals on Noah's Ark.

But to give a few concrete quotes:

God good to all, or just a few?PSA 145:9 The LORD is good to all: and his tender mercies are over all his works.

JER 13:14 And I will dash them one against another, even the fathers and the sons together, saith the LORD: I will not pity, nor spare, nor have mercy, but destroy them.

[Editor's note: Some readers have raised an objection to this alleged contradiction. They point out that PSA 145:20 states that The Lord keeps all who love Him, but that He will destroy the wicked. In other words, some see no contradiction between "The Lord is good to all" and JER 13:14. Others contend, however, that even if the Lord destroys the wicked he could do so with compassion, pity, and mercy. Further, there are biblical examples that indicate that the Lord is not necessarily "good" or merciful--even to those who are not wicked. One such example is Job. As one reader points out, "If Psalm 145:9 was not a contradiction of Psalm 145:20 or Jeremiah 13:14, it would read something like this: "The LORD is good to all, except the wicked: and his tender mercies are over all his works, except when He is punishing the wicked." In any case, the idea that the Lord is good and merciful is contradicted by countless examples in the Bible where God orders the destruction of infants, personally kills David's infant child, etc.]

Which first--beasts or man?GEN 1:25 And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good. GEN 1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

GEN 2:18 And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. GEN 2:19 And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.

Human vs. ghostly impregnationACT 2:30 Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne;

MAT 1:18 Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost.

The sins of the fatherISA 14:21 Prepare slaughter for his children for the iniquity of their fathers; that they do not rise, nor possess the land, nor fill the face of the world with cities.

DEU 24:16 The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers: every man shall be put to death for his own sin._________________________________________________________Fowl from waters or ground?GEN 1:20 And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven. GEN 1:21 And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good.

GEN 2:19 And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.

_____________________________________________________________

Earth supported?JOB 26:7 He stretcheth out the north over the empty place, and hangeth the earth upon nothing.

JOB 38:4 Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding.

_________________________________________________________________Here is the order in the first (Genesis 1), the Priestly tradition:

Day 1: Sky, Earth, light Day 2: Water, both in ocean basins and above the sky(!) Day 3: Plants Day 4: Sun, Moon, stars (as calendrical and navigational aids) Day 5: Sea monsters (whales), fish, birds, land animals, creepy-crawlies (reptiles, insects, etc.) Day 6: Humans (apparently both sexes at the same time) Day 7: Nothing (the Gods took the first day off anyone ever did)

Note that there are "days," "evenings," and "mornings" before the Sun was created. Here, the Deity is referred to as "Elohim," which is a plural, thus the literal translation, "the Gods." In this tale, the Gods seem satisfied with what they have done, saying after each step that "it was good."

Moses' personalityNUM 12:3: "Now the man Moses was very meek, above all the men which were upon the fact of the earth."

NUM 31:14, 17, 18: "And Moses was wroth...And Moses said unto them, "Have ye saved all the women alive? ... Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman, ... But all the women children ... keep alive for yourselves."

Jesus' first sermon plain or mount?MAT 5:1,2: "And seeing the multitudes, he went up into a mountain: and when he was set, his disciples came unto him: And he opened his mouth, and taught them, saying...."

LUK 6:17,20: "And he came down with them, and stood in the plain, and the company of his disciples, and a great multitude of people...came to hear him.. And he lifted up his eyes on his disciples and said..."

Jesus' last wordsMAT 27:46,50: "And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, "Eli, eli, lama sabachthani?" that is to say, "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?" ...Jesus, when he cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost."

LUK 23:46: "And when Jesus had cried with a loud voice, he said, "Father, unto thy hands I commend my spirit:" and having said thus, he gave up the ghost."

JOH 19:30: "When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, "It is finished:" and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost."

Years of famineII SAMUEL 24:13: So God came to David, and told him, and said unto him, shall SEVEN YEARS OF FAMINE come unto thee in thy land? or will thou flee three months before thine enemies, while they pursue. thee?

I CHRONICLES 21:11: SO God came to David, and said unto him, Thus saith the LORD, Choose thee. Either THREE YEARS OF FAMINE or three months to be destroyed before thy foes, while that the sword of thine enemies overtaketh thee;

The GENEALOGY OF JESUS?In two places in the New Testament the genealogy of Jesus son of Mary is mentioned. MAT 1:6-16 and LUK 3:23-31. Each gives the ancestors of Joseph the CLAIMED husband of Mary and Step father of Jesus. The first one starts from Abraham(verse 2) all the way down to Jesus. The second one from Jesus all the way back to Adam. The only common name to these two lists between David and Jesus is JOSEPH, How can this be true? and also How can Jesus have a genealogy when all Muslims and most Christians believe that Jesus had/has no father.

God be seen?EXO 24:9,10; AMO 9:1; GEN 26:2; and JOH 14:9 God CAN be seen: "And I will take away my hand, and thou shalt see my backparts." (EXO 33:23) "And the Lord spake to Moses face to face, as a man speaketh to his friend." (EXO 33:11) "For I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved." (GEN 32:30)

God CANNOT be seen: "No man hath seen God at any time." (JOH 1:18) "And he said, Thou canst not see my face; for there shall no man see me and live." (EXO 33:20) "Whom no man hath seen nor can see." (1TIM 6:16)

CRUEL, UNMERCIFUL, DESTRUCTIVE, and FEROCIOUS or KIND, MERCIFUL, and GOOD:"I will not pity, nor spare, nor have mercy, but destroy." (JER 13:14) "Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not, but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling."

"The Lord is very pitiful and of tender mercy." (JAS 5:11) "For his mercy endureth forever." (1CH 16:34) "The Lord is good to all, and his tender mercies are over all his works." (PSA 145:9) "God is love." (1JO 4:16)

How many times did the cock crow?MAR 14:72 And the second time the cock crew. And Peter called to mind the word that Jesus said unto him, Before the cock crow twice, thou shalt deny me thrice. And when he thought thereon, he wept.

MAT 26:74 Then began he to curse and to swear, saying, I know not the man. And immediately the cock crew. MAT 26:75 And Peter remembered the word of Jesus, which said unto him, Before the cock crow, thou shalt deny me thrice. And he went out, and wept bitterly.

LUK 22:60 And Peter said, Man, I know not what thou sayest. And immediately, while he yet spake, the cock crew. LUK 22:61 And the Lord turned, and looked upon Peter. And Peter remembered the word of the Lord, how he had said unto him, Before the cock crow, thou shalt deny me thrice.

How many beatitudes in the Sermon on the MountMAT 5:3 Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. MAT 5:4 Blessed are they that mourn: for they shall be comforted. MAT 5:5 Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth. MAT 5:6 Blessed are they which do hunger and thirst after righteousness: for they shall be filled. MAT 5:7 Blessed are the merciful: for they shall obtain mercy. MAT 5:8 Blessed are the pure in heart: for they shall see God. MAT 5:9 Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God. MAT 5:10 Blessed are they which are persecuted for righteousness' sake: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. MAT 5:11 Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake.

LUK 6:20 And he lifted up his eyes on his disciples, and said, Blessed be ye poor: for yours is the kingdom of God. LUK 6:21 Blessed are ye that hunger now: for ye shall be filled. Blessed are ye that weep now: for ye shall laugh. LUK 6:22 Blessed are ye, when men shall hate you, and when they shall separate you from their company, and shall reproach you, and cast out your name as evil, for the Son of man's sake. LUK 6:23 Rejoice ye in that day, and leap for joy: for, behold, your reward is great in heaven: for in the like manner did their fathers unto the prophets.

Does every man sin?1KI 8:46 If they sin against thee, (for there is no man that sinneth not,) and thou be angry with them, and deliver them to the enemy, so that they carry them away captives unto the land of the enemy, far or near;

2CH 6:36 If they sin against thee, (for there is no man which sinneth not,) and thou be angry with them, and deliver them over before their enemies, and they carry them away captives unto a land far off or near;

PRO 20:9 Who can say, I have made my heart clean, I am pure from my sin?

ECC 7:20 For there is not a just man upon earth, that doeth good, and sinneth not.

JO1 1:8 If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. JO1 1:9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. JO1 1:10 If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us.

JO1 3:9 Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God.

Who bought potter's fieldACT 1:18 Now this man purchased a field with the reward of iniquity; and falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all his bowels gushed out. ACT 1:19 And it was known unto all the dwellers at Jerusalem; insomuch as that field is called in their proper tongue, Aceldama, that is to say, The field of blood.

MAT 27:6 And the chief priests took the silver pieces, and said, It is not lawful for to put them into the treasury, because it is the price of blood. MAT 27:7 And they took counsel, and bought with them the potter's field, to bury strangers in. MAT 27:8 Wherefore that field was called, The field of blood, unto this day.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------Who bears guilt?GAL 6:2 Bear ye one another's burdens, and so fulfil the law of Christ.

How many children did Michal, the daughter of Saul, have?2SA 6:23 Therefore Michal the daughter of Saul had no child unto the day of her death.

2SA 21:8 But the king took the two sons of Rizpah the daughter of Aiah, whom she bare unto Saul, Armoni and Mephibosheth; and the five sons of Michal the daughter of Saul, whom she brought up for Adriel the son of Barzillai the Meholathite:

How old was Jehoiachin when he began to reign?2KI 24:8 Jehoiachin was eighteen years old when he began to reign, and he reigned in Jerusalem three months. And his mother's name was Nehushta, the daughter of Elnathan of Jerusalem.

2CH 36:9 Jehoiachin was eight years old when he began to reign, and he reigned three months and ten days in Jerusalem: and he did that which was evil in the sight of the LORD.

Judging1 Cor 2:15 "The spiritual man makes judgments about all things, but he himself is not subject to any man's judgment:" (NIV)

1 Cor 4:5 "Therefore judge nothing before the appointed time; wait till the Lord comes. He will bring to light what is hidden in darkness and will expose the motives of men's hearts. At that time each will receive his praise from God."

Good deedsMatt 5:16 "In the same way, let your light shine before men, that they may see your good deeds and praise your Father in heaven." (NIV)

Matt 6:3-4 "But when you give to the needy, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing, so that your giving may be in secret. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you." (NIV)

Whom did they see at the tomb?MAT 28:2 And, behold, there was a great earthquake: for the angel of the Lord descended from heaven, and came and rolled back the stone from the door, and sat upon it. MAT 28:3 His countenance was like lightning, and his raiment white as snow: MAT 28:4 And for fear of him the keepers did shake, and became as dead men. MAT 28:5 And the angel answered and said unto the women, Fear not ye: for I know that ye seek Jesus, which was crucified.

MAR 16:5 And entering into the sepulchre, they saw a young man sitting on the right side, clothed in a long white garment; and they were affrighted.

LUK 24:4 And it came to pass, as they were much perplexed thereabout, behold, two men stood by them in shining garments:

JOH 20:12 And seeth two angels in white sitting, the one at the head, and the other at the feet, where the body of Jesus had lain.

Destruction of cities (what said was jeremiah was zechariah)MAT 27:9 Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by Jeremy the prophet, saying, And they took the thirty pieces of silver, the price of him that was valued, whom they of the children of Israel did value;

How long was Jesus in the tomb?Depends where you look; MAT 12:40 gives Jesus prophesying that he will spend "three days and three nights in the heart of the earth," and MAR 10:34 has "after three days (meta treis emeras) he will rise again." As far as I can see from a quick look, the prophecies have "after three days," but the post-Resurrection narratives have "on the third day."

« Last Edit: September 09, 2013, 08:54:14 AM by Hatter23 »

Logged

An Omnipowerful God needed to sacrifice himself to himself (but only for a long weekend) in order to avert his own wrath against his own creations who he made in a manner knowing that they weren't going to live up to his standards.

When I hear a claim that something is untrue about the bible, I tend to take the time to research what the problem is and decide if the claims are valid. So far, at worst, the bible appears unverifiable in parts or ambiguous in others, but nothing absolutely wrong or contradictory.....

One: Non answers like "You lie;" or "I will need to get back to you;" or "You don't deserve an answer;" or "You aren't asking the right questions;" are not answers...they are evasions

Correct him if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure that was someone else. There are names conveniently located on the upper left hand side of the box.

Unless you are referring to what I alluded to a few times - you cannot ask a false question. Q: Why do you not question the bible? A: I DO question the bible, therefore that question cannot be answered.

Quote

Two: I never said Bible. This is a jumping off point for any Ancient text gnostic theism. It doesn't work for Deists. I like Deists.

Which was part of the reason I mentioned them, kind of as a joke... you know... don't worry about it.

Quote

Three: All of Genesis contradicts many many many verifiable scientific facts. Your argument is a non starter right at the start.

It is? Oh my bad.

Quote

As to Contradictions?

As to the last part of what I said, almost as if I knew you would go off on this tangent rather than just taking what I said at face value, ahem: "By the way, don't ask me about specifics, the bible is a big book and there are plenty of other forums and people to ask about such things."

Very curious indeed that nobody has answered you. I guess I'm one of those names you'll add to people who haven't answered that simple question that mystically turned into 300.

Well, I suppose I could hang around typing for weeks and weeks about the different things in the bible. Or, I guess you could just take what I say as something akin to: We believe evolution because Dr X says or I can prove it, etc without spending those weeks which I'm sure it would take to have an effective argument on the varied subjects. Bravo on the ad hominem tho, I can see why you are a moderator

One: Non answers like "You lie;" or "I will need to get back to you;" or "You don't deserve an answer;" or "You aren't asking the right questions;" are not answers...they are evasions

Correct him if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure that was someone else. There are names conveniently located on the upper left hand side of the box.

Unless you are referring to what I alluded to a few times - you cannot ask a false question. Q: Why do you not question the bible? A: I DO question the bible, therefore that question cannot be answered.

Yet still more dancing around I see.

One: I listed your answer AS ONE of various "non-answers" You attempt to condecendingly deflect that criticism is quite obvious...and still a non answer

Two: You counter-question is a classic loaded question. A simple confirmation of standard human tendencies is NOT a loaded question. There is no equivalency. Mine is neither a false question, nor is it a loaded question.

Three: All of Genesis contradicts many many many verifiable scientific facts. Your argument is a non starter right at the start.

It is? Oh my bad.

Quote

As to Contradictions?

As to the last part of what I said, almost as if I knew you would go off on this tangent rather than just taking what I said at face value, ahem: "By the way, don't ask me about specifics, the bible is a big book and there are plenty of other forums and people to ask about such things."

Very curious indeed that nobody has answered you. I guess I'm one of those names you'll add to people who haven't answered that simple question that mystically turned into 300.

First; were do you get 300? Two; your name is being added because, here's a thought:

YOU DIDN'T ANSWER

Yes you said "By the way, don't ask me about specifics, the bible is a big book and there are plenty of other forums and people to ask about such things."

However, I have a tendency to actually hold people's feet to the fire and not weasel out of making blanket unsupported assertions.

Logged

An Omnipowerful God needed to sacrifice himself to himself (but only for a long weekend) in order to avert his own wrath against his own creations who he made in a manner knowing that they weren't going to live up to his standards.

Then when someone makes a claim, whether in person or in an ancient text, there is a possiblity(sic) that such a claim is a hallucination, lie, or exaggeration.

If this claim lies outside of the way you see the world working with your owns senses, it should be treated with skepticism. A talking cat for instance. They could have hallucinated that a cat talked, or lied about it to make them seem cool to their cat loving friends, or even it could have been an exaggeration about the sounds the cat were making being somewhat similar to a few words of human speech.

Since this is how you treat everything else in your life, why do you make a special exception for the Bible and miracles people claim based on it happening with prayer? What makes you so sure they are not a hallicination(sic), lie, or exaggeration?

This is your question from an earlier comment, which involves the incorrect assertion: "...you make a special exception for the Bible and miracles people claim..." This is clearly directed at a person you are talking to, not general human tendencies, and I was merely correcting you, because that is not true about me. Akin to asking the grade school question "why are you stupid?"

Quote

One: I listed your answer AS ONE of various "non-answers" You attempt to condecendingly(sic) deflect that criticism is quite obvious...and still a non answer

Two: You(sic) counter-question is a classic loaded question. A simple confirmation of standard human tendencies is NOT a loaded question. There is no equivalency. Mine is neither a false question, nor is it a loaded question.

Then you proceed to tell me that it was a question about standard human tendencies? If this is a philosophical debate, then it is an easy question, people don't question the bible because they are foolish. Now did I answer your question?

Quote

First; were(sic) do you get 300? Two; your name is being added because, here's a thought:

YOU DIDN'T ANSWER

Yes you said "By the way, don't ask me about specifics, the bible is a big book and there are plenty of other forums and people to ask about such things."

However, I have a tendency to actually hold people's feet to the fire and not weasel out of making blanket unsupported assertions.

I didn't bother to count the number of arguments you presented, suffice to say that it would take me an exceedingly long time to answer all of them, but I'm sure you knew that. Not to say that it is impossible, but if you want a simple question answered and turn it into... lets say 50... it is no longer simple, meaning that you believe you have won, when you have only moved the goalpost.

Then when someone makes a claim, whether in person or in an ancient text, there is a possiblity(sic) that such a claim is a hallucination, lie, or exaggeration.

If this claim lies outside of the way you see the world working with your owns senses, it should be treated with skepticism. A talking cat for instance. They could have hallucinated that a cat talked, or lied about it to make them seem cool to their cat loving friends, or even it could have been an exaggeration about the sounds the cat were making being somewhat similar to a few words of human speech.

Since this is how you treat everything else in your life, why do you make a special exception for the Bible and miracles people claim based on it happening with prayer? What makes you so sure they are not a hallicination(sic), lie, or exaggeration?

This is your question from an earlier comment, which involves the incorrect assertion: "...you make a special exception for the Bible and miracles people claim..." This is clearly directed at a person you are talking to, not general human tendencies, and I was merely correcting you, because that is not true about me. Akin to asking the grade school question "why are you stupid?"

If you state you you state you are a Christian, you do make an exemption for your book as opposed to other contradictory texts

I didn't bother to count the number of arguments you presented, suffice to say that it would take me an exceedingly long time to answer all of them, but I'm sure you knew that. Not to say that it is impossible, but if you want a simple question answered and turn it into... lets say 50... it is no longer simple, meaning that you believe you have won, when you have only moved the goalpost.

I am not moving the goalposts. You stated

Quote

So far, at worst, the bible appears unverifiable in parts or ambiguous in others, but nothing absolutely wrong or contradictory which would probably show exaggerations or lies etc

and I disproved it. So no moving the goalposts. You are once again dancing around and evading, deflecting and misdirecting.

Logged

An Omnipowerful God needed to sacrifice himself to himself (but only for a long weekend) in order to avert his own wrath against his own creations who he made in a manner knowing that they weren't going to live up to his standards.

Then when someone makes a claim, whether in person or in an ancient text, there is a possiblity(sic) that such a claim is a hallucination, lie, or exaggeration.

If this claim lies outside of the way you see the world working with your owns senses, it should be treated with skepticism. A talking cat for instance. They could have hallucinated that a cat talked, or lied about it to make them seem cool to their cat loving friends, or even it could have been an exaggeration about the sounds the cat were making being somewhat similar to a few words of human speech.

Since this is how you treat everything else in your life, why do you make a special exception for the Bible and miracles people claim based on it happening with prayer? What makes you so sure they are not a hallicination(sic), lie, or exaggeration?

This is your question from an earlier comment, which involves the incorrect assertion: "...you make a special exception for the Bible and miracles people claim..." This is clearly directed at a person you are talking to, not general human tendencies, and I was merely correcting you, because that is not true about me. Akin to asking the grade school question "why are you stupid?"

If you state you you state you are a Christian, you do make an exemption for your book as opposed to other contradictory texts

I didn't bother to count the number of arguments you presented, suffice to say that it would take me an exceedingly long time to answer all of them, but I'm sure you knew that. Not to say that it is impossible, but if you want a simple question answered and turn it into... lets say 50... it is no longer simple, meaning that you believe you have won, when you have only moved the goalpost.

I am not moving the goalposts. You stated

Quote

So far, at worst, the bible appears unverifiable in parts or ambiguous in others, but nothing absolutely wrong or contradictory which would probably show exaggerations or lies etc

and I disproved it. So no moving the goalposts. You are once again dancing around and evading, deflecting and misdirecting.

Then when someone makes a claim, whether in person or in an ancient text, there is a possiblity(sic) that such a claim is a hallucination, lie, or exaggeration.

If this claim lies outside of the way you see the world working with your owns senses, it should be treated with skepticism. A talking cat for instance. They could have hallucinated that a cat talked, or lied about it to make them seem cool to their cat loving friends, or even it could have been an exaggeration about the sounds the cat were making being somewhat similar to a few words of human speech.

Since this is how you treat everything else in your life, why do you make a special exception for the Bible and miracles people claim based on it happening with prayer? What makes you so sure they are not a hallicination(sic), lie, or exaggeration?

This is your question from an earlier comment, which involves the incorrect assertion: "...you make a special exception for the Bible and miracles people claim..." This is clearly directed at a person you are talking to, not general human tendencies, and I was merely correcting you, because that is not true about me. Akin to asking the grade school question "why are you stupid?"

If you state you you state you are a Christian, you do make an exemption for your book as opposed to other contradictory texts

I didn't bother to count the number of arguments you presented, suffice to say that it would take me an exceedingly long time to answer all of them, but I'm sure you knew that. Not to say that it is impossible, but if you want a simple question answered and turn it into... lets say 50... it is no longer simple, meaning that you believe you have won, when you have only moved the goalpost.

I am not moving the goalposts. You stated

Quote

So far, at worst, the bible appears unverifiable in parts or ambiguous in others, but nothing absolutely wrong or contradictory which would probably show exaggerations or lies etc

and I disproved it. So no moving the goalposts. You are once again dancing around and evading, deflecting and misdirecting.

Let me get this straight. if I answer a question by saying that I believe the bible because I've researched it, your questioning that claim somehow disproves it? It seems to me that questioning the statement that I have researched it is... another question on top of the original question. Please tell me you recognize that? I mean, you can tell me all day long that the bible is full of contradictions, but if you question me on what they are, you are asking another question. You can't elaborate on the original question because that's moving the goalpost, get it? Look, I'm really not interested in debating you about this same thing repeatedly. Obviously you will not concede that you changed the original question, so there's no way you can lose. I applaud you.

It seems to me that questioning the statement that I have researched it is... another question on top of the original question. Please tell me you recognize that? I mean, you can tell me all day long that the bible is full of contradictions, but if you question me on what they are, you are asking another question. You can't elaborate on the original question because that's moving the goalpost, get it? Look, I'm really not interested in debating you about this same thing repeatedly. Obviously you will not concede that you changed the original question, so there's no way you can lose. I applaud you.

The reasoning was:

Quote

"Do you acknowledge people hallucinate, lie, and exaggerate?"

Yes? OK

Then when someone makes a claim, whether in person or in an ancient text, there is a possiblity that such a claim is a hallucination, lie, or exaggeration.

If this claim lies outside of the way you see the world working with your owns senses, it should be treated with skepticism. A talking cat for instance. They could have hallucinated that a cat talked, or lied about it to make them seem cool to their cat loving friends, or even it could have been an exaggeration about the sounds the cat were making being somewhat similar to a few words of human speech.

Since this is how you treat everything else in your life, why do you make a special exception for the Bible and miracles people claim based on it happening with prayer? What makes you so sure they are not a hallicination, lie, or exaggeration?

Which you attempted to counter with the concept that your particular favorite ancient text did not have contradictions.That you treated it with the same skepticism as other fantastical claims.

I disproved both of those premises.

There is no moving the goalposts on my part. Your attempted counter was simply defeated.

Quote

Obviously you will not concede that you changed the original question

because I didn't.

Quote

so there's no way you can lose.

Yup. When you hold a position that matches objective reality, you can't.

« Last Edit: September 09, 2013, 02:53:33 PM by Hatter23 »

Logged

An Omnipowerful God needed to sacrifice himself to himself (but only for a long weekend) in order to avert his own wrath against his own creations who he made in a manner knowing that they weren't going to live up to his standards.

Well, I suppose I could hang around typing for weeks and weeks about the different things in the bible. Or, I guess you could just take what I say as something akin to: We believe evolution because Dr X says or I can prove it, etc without spending those weeks which I'm sure it would take to have an effective argument on the varied subjects. Bravo on the ad hominem tho, I can see why you are a moderator

For you not to immediately post pages and pages on your research is quite acceptable.

For you to refuse in advance to countenance any questions and refuse to give any specifics is not. I note that you removed what YOU had said from your answer - I've included it again below.

By the way, don't ask me about specifics, the bible is a big book and there are plenty of other forums and people to ask about such things.

Tell me: if someone said to YOU:"You are wrong - and I know exactly why you are wrong - but I will not tell you"what would your reaction be?

If I got that wrong, and you ARE prepared to explain specifically how your research will answer us on any specific question, then I will retract my comment with a full apology.

Ad hominem itself warrants apology, because it is a false argument directed at me, not at my argument.

The refusal was made in advance in the expectation that the goalpost would be moved, which turned out to be correct, please read my previous post.

I am not HERE going to answer an unlimited amount of questions about the bible, there is no possible way that I can do that, which is why it is easy to say you can win by moving the goalpost indefinitely. I indeed answered the original question, which is the whole point is it not? If you want more than that, post another question (singular) that can be answered once and for all, and I will answer it.

When I told him he was wrong, I told him why specifically, UNTIL he moved the goalpost. Please inform Hatter23 the definition of moving the goalpost, possibly after informing yourself if you are going to ask me the same thing he did.

An ad hominem is an attack on x's character rather than addressing the argument x has presented; it is not "a false argument directed" at x like you're claiming. Or maybe you're aware and just hastily shot off a reply. A fallacy involving purposeful misdirection, as you've described it, would be more akin to a red herring or strawman. I also haven't seen Hatter or Anfauglir shift the goalpost. If you have found Hatter's list of biblical contradictions too large to deal with, simply choose one to focus on and go from there rather than calling it a fallacy.

You made the claim that there are no contradictory passages in the Bible which show an exaggeration or a lie. Hatter has provided you with quite the list. If you do as you say, which is...

An ad hominem is an attack on x's character rather than addressing the argument x has presented; it is not "a false argument directed" at x like you're claiming. Or maybe you're aware and just hastily shot off a reply.

Actually, you're right. But, just because I misdefined it, does not mean that I was wrong that it was an ad hominem. Incidentally, you commited the fallacy fallacy, implying that I am wrong because my definition is wrong.

Quote

You made the claim that there are no contradictory passages in the Bible which show an exaggeration or a lie. Hatter has provided you with quite the list

And he did so after I answered the original question, which is called moving the goalpost. You should also inform yourself the meaning of that, apparently.

Quote

If you have found Hatter's list of biblical contradictions too large to deal with, simply choose one to focus on and go from there rather than calling it a fallacy.

You are thinking that he will be satisfied after I answer a single one? There is no way that's possible. If I was to answer EVERY single one, there are always more, which surely everyone here will attest to. Which means that this conversation would go on until one of us passes out or dies, and the other is the victor.

I've sort of stated this quite a few times, but please before you respond, perhaps you could learn the definition of moving the goalpost, then tell me why hatter didn't do that, or something along those lines.

Actually, you're right. But, just because I misdefined it, does not mean that I was wrong that it was an ad hominem. Incidentally, you commited the fallacy fallacy, implying that I am wrong because my definition is wrong.

Actually, in that part he just pointed out that your definition was wrong.

If your definition was wrong, then pointing out the fact is not a fallacy. It's actually sort of the opposite of a fallacy.

But, just because I misdefined it, does not mean that I was wrong that it was an ad hominem.

Fair enough. Then please cite the ad hominem that was used against you. I honestly can't find it. The first time you mention an ad hominem in this thread is toward Anfauglir where he derides you a bit in Reply #33. Derision itself is not a fallacy.

I've sort of stated this quite a few times, but please before you respond, perhaps you could learn the definition of moving the goalpost, then tell me why hatter didn't do that, or something along those lines.

Sure. In Reply #40 you claim Hatter is shifting the goalpost if he goads you into answering one question, but then extending it into endless questions which you would refuse to answer, whereby he claims victory.

Is this shifting the goalposts? Yes, in a way. Bar the fact neither of you agreed upon what standard was acceptable for ending the argument.

Did Hatter shift the goalposts? No. Why not? Because Hatter didn't do that. All he did was present a list of contradictions for you to consider and nothing more. The list he presented was in rebuttal to your claim there are no contradictory passages which show exaggerations or outright lies:

ChristianConspirator: "There are no contradictions."Hatter23: "Here are a few."

If your definition was wrong, then pointing out the fact is not a fallacy

Please look up fallacy fallacy.

Saying your conclusion is incorrect because you used a fallacy, is fallacious. Pointing out that you used an incorrect definition is not.

Seriously, if someone makes a mistake that's getting in the way of the discussion, how does one go about correcting that without pointing it out? If you say something silly, someone's going to comment on it. This isn't inherently fallacious.

Dude, we've been doing this for years. Literally. We see this stuff day in and day out. We have a pretty good idea of what a fallacy is. Better than about 99% of the population.

Calm down will yah? Anyway, it's not like this is the first forum I've ever seen either, but seriously, my last several posts have been correcting several fallacies. I'm sure not everyone here is like that, but it does tend to bother me when those are the people who respond.

Quote

Rather than incorrectly label fallacies and then argue about it, maybe you could actually address a point or two instead. How about it?

Unfortunately you need to show first that it was an incorrect label, rather than Ipse dixiting it.